AC Transit General Manager David Armijo resigned abruptly after serving the transit agency for three years.  A majority of the Board members evidently had come to the conclusion he should be terminated.  His resignation preempted a possible termination. 

AC Transit over the years had rarely had a general manager with full transit expertise.  Numerous riders and taxpayers had been pleased with Armijo’s significant results in balancing budgets, improving and increasing bus service, all while setting aside reserves.

Armijo described his job at AC Transit as “one of the most satisfying of any of the positions I have held during my 30-year career in transit.”

Being a personnel matter, disclosure of the Board’s displeasure with Armijo was not made public; however, Piedmont’s representative on the Board, Greg Harper publicly stated he did not agree with the majority.

For more information on the General Manager’s resignation, click on the following links:

http://www.eastbayexpress.com/SevenDays/archives/2015/03/26/ac-transit-gm-quits

Opinion: Calls for an appointed Board of Directors >  http://www.insidebayarea.com/opinion/ci_27589446/guest-commentary-ac-transit-desperate-needs-an-appointed

https://www.enotrans.org/eno-brief/in-the-spotlight-david-armijo

http://www.mercurynews.com/my-town/ci_27816922/ac-transit-search-new-gm-set

http://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/matier-ross/article/Wild-management-ride-at-troubled-AC-transit-6164583.php

http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/David-Armijo-chosen-general-manager-of-AC-Transit-3229435.php

New water use limits on lawns, hotels and restaurants became law March 27, 2015. – 

The California State Water Resources Control Board announced continuation of 2014 water use restrictions and added new regulations on March 17, which following 10 days review by the State Office of Administrative Law became effective March 27. One new restriction will prove problematic for Piedmonters who set their watering system to water two days per week, as watering is prohibited when there is a very brief shower of a small fraction of an inch of precipitation.  Watering can resume after 48 hours have elapsed from the time of the precipitation.

New restrictions affecting urban and suburban homeowners:

– Prohibit outdoor landscape watering within 48 hours of measurable precipitation.

– Require cities, counties, water districts and private companies to limit lawn watering to two days a week if they aren’t already limiting lawn and landscape watering to a certain number of days a week. The rule applies to the 411 water providers with more than 3,000 customers in California, which covers more than 95 percent of the state’s population.

Read the complete announcement.

The Water Resources Control Board focused on landscaping and outdoor cleaning in urban and suburban communities, estimating that outdoor irrigation makes up 44 percent of water use in metropolitan areas. However, if water providers are currently limiting the number of watering days in the week, up to even three, four, five or six days, those rules may remain in effect, without further restrictions. In other words, those water providers that have imposed the most generous water use limitations are rewarded with the greatest flexibility. The rule applies to all of the 411 water providers with more than 3,000 customers in California. (Water providers with fewer than 3,000 customers are not subject to the water conservation requirements.)

The East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) already limits lawn watering to two days a week by its customers in Alameda County, including Piedmont, and Contra Costa County with the strictest watering limits in the Bay Area. In contrast, the San Jose Water Company, which provides water to one million residents, limits outdoor watering to three 0r four days per week, (on odd or even dates, by street address). San Francisco, Sunnyvale, Santa Clara and people served by San Jose’s city water department do not have day-of-the-week restrictions.

Reaffirmed – 2014 State Water Resources Control Board restrictions on urban and suburban communities prohibition of:

• Run-off from landscape watering onto adjacent property, sidewalks or streets.
• Washing sidewalks and driveways with drinking water. (Recycled water is permitted.)
• Using a hose to wash a vehicle unless the hose has a shut-off nozzle.
• Using drinking water in an ornamental fountain unless the water is recirculated.

Power-washing of sidewalks, streets and buildings is still exempted.

Drought emergency reminds residents they are not the most intensive water users. –

While agriculture uses 75% of the state’s water, the California State Water Resources Control Board has focused water use restrictions on urban and suburban areas.  In a recent editorial the San Diego Union-Tribune criticized the State Water Resources Control Board’s meager and ineffective regulation of groundwater pumping and high water consuming agricultural crops.

“… groundwater is being pumped so rapidly for agriculture in the Central Valley that the land in some areas is literally sinking at the rate of a foot or more per year. Should we really be growing water-intensive crops like almonds and rice in drought-prone California? The Legislature last year finally enacted a package of bills intended to end the state’s pump-as-you-please groundwater policy. But it merely requires local water agencies to develop groundwater management plans.”

Applications are due by 5 p.m. Wednesday, March 25 at City Hall for volunteer positions on Piedmont commissions and committees.

Read prior PCA article for details. <

 Here is an opportunity for Piedmont residents to identify new capital projects in the community.

There is $407,000 in the Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) Fund available for projects.

Residents may notice areas that need capital funding such as hazardous intersections and medians, needed plantings, protective pedestrian fencing, additional recreation facilities, accomodations for elderly persons, ways to save water, pool improvements, Community Hall Plaza, or any desired public project. 

“The Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) Committee is soliciting proposals for new city projects which would enhance our community. Ideas submitted by individuals, community organizations and City Staff are all considered. If you have a great idea, the committee would like to hear from you.”

The Capital Improvement Projects Committee (CIP) will hold a meeting on Thursday, March 26th at 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall Conference Room. Click to read the agenda.  This meeting is open to the public. The meeting will not be broadcast and written minutes are not kept.  The March 26th agenda calls for City Staff CIP Presentations [Various Departments], Review of Proposed Work Schedule and CIP Tour, and a Review of New Citizen Proposal Form.

The Capital Improvement Project Committee (CIP) will be receiving public proposals for desired capital projects. Projects can be simple or complex.  Those proposing projects need not have complete information, such as funding.  The more a project proposal details a need, the more likely the project will be added to a consideration list by the CIP Committee for referral to the City Council.

The Citizen Proposal Form does not list a deadline for submitting a citizen proposals, yet all proposals should be submitted promptly to the Department of Public Works for consideration by the CIP Committee. The tour and identification of projects are expected sometime in April.

Completed forms should be returned to the Department of Public Works, 120 Vista Avenue. If you have questions regarding the CIP process and proposals, please contact Mark Feldkamp, Parks & Project Manager, at (510) 420-3064.

Click > for the proposal form.

“It is not necessary to complete all of the information on this form; general project descriptions, project justification and estimates of costs are the basic items required [as feasible]. Additionally, it is helpful to suggest a potential funding source. City staff will contact you to discuss the recommended project in more detail. The City of Piedmont appreciates your participation in this process.”

The members of the CIP Committee are:

MEMBERS APPOINTED BY THE COUNCIL (4):  John Cooper (Chair), Ryan Gilbert, Bobbe Stehr (Former Planning Commissioner) and Jamie Totsubo (Park Commissioner)

PIEDMONT GARDEN CLUB’S PIEDMONT BEAUTIFICATION FOUNDATION APPOINTEE (1): Deborah Van Nest  (President of the Beautification Foundation)

PARK COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE (1): Sue Herrick (Chair of the Park Commission)

RECREATION COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE (1): Nick Levinson (Chair of the Recreation Commission)

COUNCIL LIAISON, as observer: Vice Mayor Jeff Wieler, alternate Councilmember Teddy King

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

STAFF LIAISONS: Chester Nakahara (W) 420-3061 & Mark Feldkamp (W) 420-3064.

On Tuesday, March 24, the East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) Board will consider a proposed $1.8 billion budget that EBMUD’s General Manager Alexander Coate will present on Tuesday, March 24, to the Board of Directors. The budget funds critical capital projects, accounts for increased water supply costs because of drought, and balances slimmed down water sales.

Under the first year of this proposal, the average EBMUD household that uses about 7,500 gallons per month would see an increase in their monthly water charge of $3.57, increasing their bill from $48.60 to $52.17 each month. That is about a 7 percent increase to most residential water bills for fiscal year 2016. About two-thirds of EBMUD’s single family residential customers use less than the average amount.

The highest one percent of water using households, those using about 45,000 gallons per month, would see an increase in their monthly water charge of $47.69, increasing their bill from $264.68 to $312.37 each month. That is about an 18 percent increase for those customers in fiscal year 2016.

The wide range in water rate increases in fiscal year 2016 stems from the findings of a cost of service study the district conducted last year. State law requires rates be based on the cost of service. The study recommended adjustments for rates in all customer classes and all tier levels to match customer costs with services received.

An additional 7 percent rate increase for all water customers also is proposed for fiscal year 2017.

New this year to the budget are proposed temporary drought surcharges of up to 25 percent. The drought surcharges of 8, 20 or 25 percent would apply to all customers only during a declared stage 2, 3 or 4 drought and only on the volume of water they use. Drought surcharges primarily would pay for water supplies via EBMUD’s Freeport facility on the Sacramento River.

Meeting of the Planning Commission

on Monday, March 9, 2015

        The Planning Commission meets on the second Monday every month.  The purpose of the Planning Commission is to okay modifications to or construction of buildings and fences in Piedmont.  They also advise the City Council on any planning or building matters.

        Before entering the room tensions were high, everyone was anticipating the crucifixion that comes not only from the board members but from your neighbors who will try to get rid of any improvements to your home, because who likes change?    On the agenda there were at least ten issues, the first subject brought up was the consent calendar with the plans that the commission “Okayed” as is.  Fifteen people got up and smiling ear to ear on hearing that their remodel, construction, or renovation was passed and that they did not have to go down and speak for their plan, and then hear for the next ten minutes from the five commission members rip apart the plans they had spent the past weeks creating and changing to make perfect.

        Juan Perez was one of the lucky people already “Okayed” and set to continue.  Juan Perez is a general contractor and working on a project for a woman in Piedmont.  He and the architect and his client all had to come to the meeting prepared to defend their plans.  Luckily their plan passed,  but if it had not been approved, they would have gone through “many rounds of appeals and more commission meetings”.

        At the meeting on March 9th the issues brought forward were all about the improvement and construction of homes.  For every issue brought forward there were neighbors who either voiced their support or opposition for the project.

       The first application was about 38 Monte Avenue.  The owners wanted  to demolish the existing garage and build a new garage on  Monte Avenue requiring a setback variance and also build a cottage.  The family that owns the house, the designer, and the architect all spoke about the plans.

       The main point that they all made was the goal to keep the integrity of the house and discussion with neighbors.  But even with their many meetings with neighbors to keep everyone happy two of the neighbors went up and spoke against the plan.  One of their concerns was a lack of parking that would increase if the garage was moved.

      One Monte Avenue parking space available at this point would be lost if the garage was moved and a wind tunnel could also be a problem.  Another major issue was the new height of the cottage, which could impede sunlight for neighboring homes and privacy.

      After everyone had spoken the board closed it for public discussion and discussed among the five council members.  Commissioner Simpson supported the plan with a change to the garage plan.  At first all the commissioners had a different plan to fix the remodel. Commissioner Simpson made a motion that would make everyone happy, except the family who owns the house.  The construction was not passed, but not denied.  They were sent back to make a new plan that would not have such a large impact on the neighbors.

      The second agenda item brought forward was about a renovation at 333 Scenic Avenue.  First to speak was the couple that owns the house.  This was not their first time at the Planning Commission.

      The plan had changed; at first they had a roof patio and a large room extension, now they just want a smaller room extension.  The neighbors were still unhappy about the increased loss of privacy and the blocking of sunlight.  Not only did the neighbors speak up against the new plan, but also had their other neighbors speak against it on their behalf.

       When everyone from the public finished speaking the commission discussed what could change, and if it should be approved as is.  Commissioner Simpson supported the new plan and believed that they had changed enough from the old plan and provided enough evidence of the true impact of the renovation.  At first, Commissioners Theophilos and Chase were against the new plan, but through further discussion they agreed to approve the plan with the condition that a fence be put up to increase privacy for the neighbors.

        For the Scenic Avenue renovation the family that owned the home had an amazing presentation with a picture slide show.  And proved that the new plan had very little impact on the neighbors, and I agreed with them.   They changed the plan so much from the first plan and sacrificed their plans to compensate for their neighbors concerns that their plan deserved to be approved.

The report above was submitted by Piedmont High School Student Sarah Mooney

Editors’ Note:  The opinions expressed are those of the author. 

Report on the Park Commission Meeting of March 4 by High School student Quinn Burnett:

On Wednesday, March 4, the Piedmont Park Commission held a meeting to discuss various issues concerning local parks and gardens. Due to the fact that Arbor Day is on the horizon, a main topic of discussion was over the various public plans for that particular day of celebration.

After the minutes were approved by the Commission, Chair Sue Herrick opened the floor to the public forum. I spoke first about my concept to go back to having fewer 10 minute parking spaces in the Community Center parking lot, as the reduced parking increases traffic on Highland Avenue and takes away spots from students and creates spots that are rarely used. The Commission agreed that the 10 minute spots allowed an easier means for parents to drop off their children at the nearby preschool and did not seem to desire to make the change that I was hoping for. Following my address to the Commission, Arash Parsa and Parker Phillips spoke about the issues of speeding on Scenic Avenue and the trimming of shrubs on Mesa Avenue, respectively.

After the public forum, the President of the Piedmont Garden Club donated three thousand dollars for Arbor Day and specifically for improvements in Dracena Park for the upcoming event that would be held there on Arbor Day. The check was accepted by the Staff Liaison Mark Feldkamp and he and the President of the Garden Club capitalized on a nice photo opportunity.

Following this donation, the head of publicity on the Park Commission, John Lenahan, took some time to talk about his efforts in the monthly newsletter, as well as additional publicity for the Arbor Day event at Dracena Park. Although there did not seem to be too many pressing matters on the agenda on March 4, Commissioner Nancy Kent, reported on a new plan to further water conservation to combat the ensuing California drought, and her outlook was quite positive as Piedmont seemed to be on top of every requirement for the plan.

Before the meeting began, I had the opportunity to speak with one of very few attending audience members, Patty Reed. Reed’s main concern was a plan that began almost a year ago called the Linda Kingston Triangle. The triangle will ideally be located on Linda Avenue, a block from Beach Elementary School and will cost almost $200,000. She told me that this project will be funded by the Piedmont Garden Club, private neighborhood partisans, and publicly by the CIP [Capital Improvement Projects]. Reed also shared with me that there had been an extensive traffic study, which concluded that traffic would be significantly reduced and safety increased, and this aspect resonated well with the Commission, which favored the project heavily in general as well.

Personally, I agreed with the motive of the Linda Kingston Triangle project, to promote safety, and I am glad to see a positive plan gain momentum as I feel that often projects like these are generally stifled by neigh-saying residents, as was the case for the infamous Blair Park project.

Finally, one representative, whose specific position I did not identify, gave a report on the general condition of the parks and streets. His summary was very positive, exuding the impression that, generally, “things are good!” He also mentioned that roughly one hundred trees were pruned this month and that if anyone wanted their street to be swept, all they would have to do is call and the street sweepers would be happy to come.

Summarily, I viewed the Commission as an efficient and positively run government body.  I also acknowledge the great amount of effort and attention to detail it takes to run such an organization successfully.

Quinn Burnett

Editors’ Note:  The opinions expressed are those of the author.

On Monday, March 16, 2015, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers, the City Council will consider regulations governing short term rentals in Piedmont.  Numbers of Piedmonters have noted problems with the rentals and asked for prohibition. Read the  > agenda.

According to information sent to PCA, the Council can expect non-residents to be present at the meeting pleading to allow short term rentals.  The meeting is open to public participation.

The meeting can be viewed at home on KCOM Cable Channel 27 and on the City website by logging on at www.ci.piedmont.ca.us: on the right hand side of the homepage under the “City Council” heading, click on the “Online Video” link, then click on the “March 16, 2015″ heading, click on the “Video” or “In Progress” link, and start watching!

Click for > Staff report 

Click for > Prior PCA Articles

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 September 6, 2014 PCA article

 September 8, 2014 PCA article

 March 3, 2015 PCA article

City seeks volunteers for commissions and committees with a deadline of Wednesday, March 25th by 5:00 p.m. –